Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Compact support gives an entire Fourier-Laplace transform by slices

Statement

Let n≥1 and let f∈L1(Rn;C) vanish almost everywhere outside a compact set K⊆Rn. Define F(z):=∫Rnf(x)e−2πi x⋅z dx,z∈Cn. Then the integral converges absolutely for every z and its value does not depend on the representative of the L1 class; for every j and every fixed values of the other n−1 complex coordinates, the coordinate slice w↦F(z1,…,zj−1,w,zj+1,…,zn) is entire on C, with ∂∂zjF(z)=∫Rnf(x) (−2πixj)e−2πi x⋅z dx; and F(x)=f∧(x) for every x∈Rn, where f∧ is the L1 transform of Fourier transform on complex L1 classes.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integer n≥1, a class f∈L1(Rn;C) vanishing almost everywhere outside a compact set K⊆Rn, and points z∈Cn and w∈C; here x⋅z=∑k=1nxkzk for x∈Rn.

[F1]

The complex exponential satisfies exp⁡(ζ+η)=exp⁡ζexp⁡η and exp⁡′=exp⁡, so (exp⁡ζ−1)/ζ→1 as ζ→0 through nonzero complex values; ∣exp⁡(ζ)∣=eRe⁡ζ (exp⁡(z+w)=exp⁡z exp⁡w, and the complex exponential extends the real exponential, The complex exponential is entire and its complex derivative is itself, exp⁡(x+iy)=ex(cos⁡y+isin⁡y), ∣exp⁡(x+iy)∣=ex, and eiπ+1=0).

[F2]

For an integrable complex function u, ∣∫u∣≤∫∣u∣ (The modulus of an integral is bounded by the integral of the modulus).

[F3]

The Lebesgue integral is complex-linear on L1, and integrable functions that agree almost everywhere have equal integrals (The Lebesgue integral is linear on L1(μ), Two integrable functions are equal almost everywhere exactly when all of their indefinite integrals agree).

[F4]

The L1 transform f^(ξ)=∫Rnf(x)e−2πix⋅ξ dx is absolutely convergent at every real ξ, is unchanged by null-set modifications of the representative, and satisfies ∣f^(ξ)∣≤∥f∥1 (Fourier transform on complex L1 classes, The integral transform is representative independent).

[F5]

A nonempty compact subset K⊆Rn is bounded, so M:=sup⁡x∈K∣x∣<∞ and Sj:=sup⁡x∈K∣xj∣≤M for every j; if K≠∅ each Sj is attained on K by the extreme value theorem (Open cover, subcover, and compact topological space; a compact subset is a subspace that is compact in its own right, Heine-Borel in Rn: with the Euclidean metric a subset of Rn is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded, and the proof by bisection uses no choice principle; the same holds on the real line, A continuous real-valued function on a nonempty compact metric space is bounded and attains a greatest and a least value). Only finiteness of Sj is used below.

[F6]

Complex-valued functions are measurable when their components are; pointwise sums, products, and compositions with continuous functions of the coordinates of measurable complex-valued functions are measurable, and so is the modulus (Complex Lp classes and Euclidean test-function conventions).

[F7]

A function on an open subset of C is holomorphic when it is complex differentiable at every point of its domain, and holomorphic on all of C means entire (Complex differentiability at a point, the complex derivative, holomorphic functions, and entire functions).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF3F5F6

Fix a representative. If K=∅ then f=0 almost everywhere, so every integral below vanishes by [F3], giving F≡0, and all claims of the lemma hold trivially; assume K≠∅ and let M be the bound of [F5]. Multiplying f by the indicator of the closed set K produces a measurable representative in L1 that vanishes everywhere outside K and agrees with f almost everywhere, so no integral below changes ([F3, F6]); from here we use this representative.

1.2givenF1F3F5F6

Absolute convergence and representative independence. For x∈K the exponential law and modulus formula [F1] give ∣f(x)e−2πix⋅z∣=∣f(x)∣e2πx⋅Im⁡z≤∣f(x)∣e2πM∣Im⁡z∣, while for x∉K both sides vanish. Hence ∫Rn∣f(x)e−2πix⋅z∣ dx≤e2πM∣Im⁡z∣∥f∥1<∞ for the given z, and since z was arbitrary the integral defining F converges absolutely at every point of Cn. If f~=f almost everywhere is a second representative, the two integrands agree almost everywhere and are both integrable, so the two integrals agree by [F3]; thus the value is representative-independent.

2.1givenF1F6step 1.2

The slice as a one-variable integral. Fix j and complex numbers zk for k≠j, and set g(x):=f(x)e−2πi∑k≠jxkzk. Then g is measurable and ∣g(x)∣≤∣f(x)∣e2πM∣Im⁡z∣ for every x by the same bound as in step 1.2, so g∈L1; for w∈C define h(w):=∫Rng(x)e−2πixjw dx. By the addition law [F1] the integrand equals f(x)e−2πix⋅z′ with z′=(z1,…,zj−1,w,zj+1,…,zn), so h(w)=F(z′) and step 1.2 shows that the integral for h(w) converges absolutely at every w∈C.

3.1givenF1F3step 2.1

Difference quotients are integrals. Fix w∈C and s∈C∖{0}. For every x the addition law [F1] gives e−2πixj(w+s)−e−2πixjw=e−2πixjw(e−2πixjs−1), and both integrands g(x)e−2πixj(w+s) and g(x)e−2πixjw are integrable because g∈L1 and the exponential factors are bounded on the support of g by step 2.1. Applying additivity and scaling from [F3] therefore yields h(w+s)−h(w)s=∫Rng(x)e−2πixjw e−2πixjs−1s dx.

4.1F1F2F3F5step 2.1step 3.1

Uniform remainder estimate. Put S:=Sj≤M and L:=∫g(x)(−2πixj)e−2πixjw dx, which is absolutely convergent since ∣xj∣≤S on the support of g. If S=0, step 3.1 is identically zero and L=0. Otherwise, for any ε>0, [F1] gives δ>0 such that ∣(eζ−1)/ζ−1∣<ε when 0<∣ζ∣<δ. For 0<∣s∣<δ/(2πS), setting ζ=−2πixjs therefore bounds the difference between the quotient integrand and its limiting integrand by 2πSεe2πS∣Im⁡w∣∣g(x)∣ on K, with zero remainder when xj=0. By [F2] and linearity [F3], ∣h(w+s)−h(w)s−L∣≤2πSεe2πS∣Im⁡w∣∥g∥1. Since ε is arbitrary, the complex difference quotient tends to L directly, without selecting a sequence.

5.1F4F7givenstep 4.1∎

Conclusion. The limit in step 4.1 shows that h is complex differentiable at every w∈C with derivative h′(w)=∫Rng(x)(−2πixj)e−2πixjw dx; a function holomorphic on all of C is entire by definition ([F7]). Rewriting the derivative integrand gives the displayed formula for ∂F/∂zj. At real z=ξ∈Rn the defining integral of F is literally the L1 transform formula, so F(ξ)=f^(ξ) at every real ξ by [F4].

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

93 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources